Cryprotectant concentrations and treatment time used in cryopreservation of red seabream.
1. Introduction
Fish gametes cryopreservation would benefit global germplasm shipping and supply, aquaculture, aquatic resources conservation and scientific research [1]. In fish sperm cryopreservation, more than 200 species have been successfully cryopreserved [2]. However, the cryopreservation of fish embryo has not been successful due to its complex multi-compartmental system, large content of water, high sensitivity to chilling, large amount of egg-yolk and low membrane permeability [3,4]. In recent years, many researches have been carried out on cryopreservation protocols [5] and mechanism of cryoinjuries in fish embryos [6].
Conventional slow cooling and vitrification are commonly used methods for long term storage of mammalian embryos. Conventional slow cooling method has been widely used in various species, but it suffers from several limitations such as chilling injury, ice formation damage, expensive equipment and tedious cooling protocols [7]. Vitrification, a solidification of a liquid without crystallization, seemed to be a promising approach. It is an extreme increase of viscosity and requires either rapid cooling rates or high concentration cryoprotectants [8], and can greatly simplify the process of cooling, avoids physical damage, and lessens the chilling injury to embryo [7]. However, the embryo cryopreserved by vitrification may still be injured by toxicity and osmotic effects of cryoprotectants [9].
Despite the fact that cryopreservation of embryos for some fish species have been attempted, successful results were not achieved [10]. Slow-cooling method had been approved to be not suitable for cryopreservation of zebrafish embryos, starfish oocytes and
Red seabream (
2. Materials and methods
2.1. Fish breeding and embryo collection
Sexually mature red seabream (8 female, 12 male; body weight, 3–4 kg) were maintained in a 12 m3 concrete rearing pond (temperature: 16-18 °C) with filtered seawater changed two times a day and pumped air supply. The photoperiod was fixed at L: D=16 h: 8 h. They were fed twice a day with cooked meat of mussel. Naturally fertilized embryos were collected each morning before feeding and then incubated in filtered seawater with pumped air supply at 18 ± 1 °C in a small plastic barrel. Embryos developed to heart-beat stage (heart rate: 60–90 beats/min (fig.1); approximately 36 h after fertilization) were used for experiments. The developmental stages of the embryo were determined morphologically using a light microscope (Nikon-YS100).
2.2. Chemicals and solutions
Dimethyl sulfoxide (DMSO) was purchased from Sigma-Aldrich, methanol (MeOH), 1,2-propylene glycol (PG) and the other chemicals were purchased from Beijing Chemical Agents Ltd. All the chemicals were analytical grade. The cryoprotectant solutions used in the following experiments were made with Hank’s solution [16] (8 g/L NaCl, 0.4 g/ L KCl, 0.14 g/ L CaCl2, 0.1 g/ L l MgSO4 7H2O, 0.1 g/ L MgCl2 6H2O, 0.06 g/ L Na2HPO4 12H2O, 1g/ L glucose, 0.35 g/ L NaHCO3) as the extender. The concentration of cryoprotectant was expressed as the percentage of volume (v/v).
2.3. Effect of cryoprotectant solutions on the embryos
For each exposure test, approximately 50 embryos were exposed to 10 mL cryoprotectant solutions with various concentrations for different exposure time (Tab 1) at room temperature (18 ± 1 °C). Three replicates were taken for each experiment group.
|
|
|
|||
S1* | 5%DMSO+5%PG | Hank’s solution | 10 | 30 | 60 |
S2* | 8%MeOH | ||||
V1** | 40%DMSO | 5 | 10 | 15 | |
V2** | 40%PG |
After immersion the embryos were first removed from the cryoprotectant solution using a nylon mesh, and carefully washed three times with fresh seawater. Then the embryos were transferred to a 100 mL beaker containing 80 mL fresh seawater for incubation with a change of seawater an hour later. Control groups were incubated in the filtered seawater at room temperature. The toxicity of cryoprotectant was assessed by the hatching rate which was calculated as the percentage of hatched larvae (48 h after fertilization) in relation to the total number of each group.
2.4. Morphological changes during exposure to cryoprotectant solutions
One embryo with seawater was loaded on a concave slide under a light microscope (Nikon-YS100). We removed the seawater with filter paper and added 100 μl cryoprotectant solution. Morphological changes were observed by taking pictures using a digital camera (Nikon CoolPix 4500) under microscope with 40× magnification and the interval was about 1 min. 5 embryos were observed for each cryoprotectant solution.
2.5. Changes of embryos during cooling and thawing process
The embryos were immersed in the four cryoprotectant solutions for different time (Tab 2), respectively. After immersion, the embryos suspended in 20 μll of cryoprotectant solution were loaded into a small quartz holding vessel and placed onto a Linkam Cryostage (Linkam-THMS600, UK). The embryos were cooled with different methods (Tab 2). After thawing, the embryos were transferred to a 100 mL beaker containing 80 mL filtered seawater for incubation. Each experiment was repeated three times. The morphological changes during the cooling-thawing process were recorded using a microscope (Olympus BX-51, Japan) with a video attachment and monitor (Nikon-E200, Japan). In addition, two temperature values,
|
|
|
||
S1 | 5%DMSO+5%PG | Immersed for 50 min | 0°C for 1 min, to -15.5°C with -3.5 °C /min, to -30°C with 3 °C /min, then to -150°C with -130°C /min and for 1 min; | to -80°C with 30°C/min, to 20°C with 130°C/min |
S2 | 8% Methanol | Immersed for 30 min | 0°C for 1 min, to -20°C with -2°C /min and for 5 min, to -60°C with -2°C/min and for 5 min, then to -150°C with -10°C/min and for 1 min; | to -70°C with 30°C/min, to 20°C with 130°C/min |
V1 | 40%DMSO | Immersed for 5 min | cooling to-150°C with -130°C /min and for 1 min; | to 20°C with 130°C/min |
V2 | 40%PG | Immersed for 10 min | cooling to-150°C with -130°C /min and for 1 min; | to 20°C with 130°C/min |
After thawing, the morphological changes of embryos were observed and recorded by the video attachment and monitor under the microscope. The proportion of morphologically intact embryos was calculated as the percentage of embryos with normal morphology in relation to the total number of each group.
2.6. Statistical analysis
Percentage data were normalized through arcsine transformation and analyzed by one-way ANOVA with SPSS software (SPSS Inc., USA). The results were expressed as means ± SD. The significant differences between treatments in the different experiments were detected using an SNK (Student Newman Keuls) statistical test (
3. Results
3.1. Effect of cryoprotectant solutions on the hatching rate of red seabream embryos
The hatching rates of embryos treated with cryoprotectant solutions are shown in Table 3. After exposure to S1 and S2 solutions, the hatching rates of embryos showed no significant decrease compared to control except for S2 solution with 60 min exposure. However, the hatching rates of embryos exposed to V1 and V2 solutions decreased sharply, only the embryos immersed in V2 solution for 5 min and 10 min had higher hatching rates (>80%). So in the later cooling experiment, we choose 60 min, 30 min, 5 min and 10 min as exposure time for S1, S2, V1 and V2, respectively.
|
|
|
|
Control | ― | ― | 99.67±0.82a |
S1 | 5%DMSO+5%PG | 10 min | 98.00±2.00a |
30 min | 100.00±0.00a | ||
60 min | 100.00±0.00a | ||
S2 | 8%MeOH | 10 min | 98.67±2.31a |
30 min | 96.67±2.31a
65.67±5.13bc |
||
60 min | |||
V1 | 40%DMSO | 5 min | 59.33±14.19c |
10 min | 15.33±5.03d | ||
15 min | 15.00±15.52d | ||
V2 | 40%PG | 5 min | 96.67±5.77a |
10 min | 81.33±22.74ab | ||
15 min | 65.00±27.73bc |
3.2. Morphological changes during exposure to cryoprotectant solutions
The morphological changes of the embryos in S1 and V1 are shown in Figure 2. The morphological changes in S2 and V2 were similar with those in S1 and V1, respectively. No obvious change was found after immersed in S solutions (after exposure for 30 min (Fig. 2-S-2). But there was an obvious dark strip around the yolk sac in V groups as soon as embryo was exposed in the cryoprotectants (Fig. 2-V-2), and the dark strip became narrower until disappeared gradually at the time of 10 min (V1, Fig. 2-V-4)/13 min (V2). At the end of immersion, the embryos presented different extent of degeneration (Fig. 2-S-6), and the degeneration in S2 was more serious (Fig. 2-S-7).
3.3. Changes of embryos during cooling and thawing process
The representative changes of embryos during cooling and thawing process under cryomicroscope are shown in Figure 3 and Figure 4. Intra-cellular ice formation occured in both group (Fig. 3-S-4,5; Fig. 4-V-2,3) when the embryos suddently blacken. According to the extent of blackening, we separated the intra-cellular ice formation temprations (
Both
When the embryos cooled to-150 °C, the phenomena was similar in S groups and V1, the whole field of view was obscured by the extra-cellular ice (Fig.3-S-6, Fig.4-V-5). In V2, the embryos were obscure, while the solutions outside the embryos were transparent, just like solid glass (Fig.4-V-9). The transparent spaces among embryos were obscured during the thawing process (Fig.4-V-10).
During the thawing process, the ice of the outside solution thawed firstly and then thawed the ice inside the embryo with the embryo brightening (Fig. 3-S-8, Fig. 4-V-7) in all four groups. After thawing, the percentage of embryos with intact morphology in the four groups were S1, 10.26%; S2, 8.19%; V1, 55.26%; and V2, 70.00%, respectively. In total, the percentage of embryos with intact morphology in V groups (62.82%) was significantly higher than that in S groups (9.21%).
|
|
|
|
|
|
S1 | 5%DMSO+5%PG | -5.00±0.17a | -17.74±0.59a | -21.40±0.31a | 16.40±0.47a |
S2 | 8%MeOH | -4.93±0.35a | -16.34±0.08a | -17.51±0.48b | 12.58±0.74b |
V1 | 40%DMSO | -70.30±2.72b | -56.83±1.48b | -64.33±0.51c | -5.97±2.21c |
V2 | 40%PG | ― | -46.23±0.31c | -53.70±1.00d | ― |
4. Discussion
4.1. Morphological changes during exposure to cryoprotectant solutions
Fish embryo is composed of three membrane-limited compartments: a large yolk surrounded by the yolk syncytial layer, a developing embryo limited by its own cell plasma membranes, and perivitelline space surrounded by chorion [17]. The different layers and membranes represent permeability barriers hindering the movement of water and cryoprotectants, and consequently, making the balance of cryoprotectant in the whole embryo difficult [18].
In the observation of morphological changes, we found a dark strip around the yolk sac after immersion in the V solutions. This may ascribe to the different refractive indexes between outer solution and perivitelline space. With the time going on, the strip became narrower and eventually disappeared. It indicated that the chorion of red seabream embryo was permeable to the cryoprotectant solutions. Similar results were found in studies on zebrafish embryos and medaka oocytes [18,19]. In V groups, the dark strip was obvious, while in S groups, the dark strip was not observed. This may be due to higher concentrations of V solutions than S solutions, which caused higer refractive index difference.
4.2. Changes of embryos during cooling and thawing process
In our cooling experiment, we have observed some different phenomena between the two methods. The first representative phenomenon in our experiment was the large dendritic ice crystals observed in S groups, but not in V groups. High cooling rate and cryoprotectant concentration were reported to be prone to vitrify and avoid dendritic ice crystal formation [20], which may explain the phenomenon in this study.
Secondly, in our result,
Thirdly, intra-cellular ice formed earlier than extra-cellular ice in V groups, which is opposite to the phenomenon in S groups. And the intra-cellular ice in V groups firstly formed in the yolk and developing embryo, then in the perivitelline space. Based on the result of section 3.2 and previous research [19], the cryoprotectant could penetrate into the chorion but hardly penetrate into the yolk syncytial layer and the developing embryo. So the concentration of cryoprotectant outside the chorion was the highest, followed by the perivitelline space, and the yolk and developing embryo was the lowest. We speculated that the sequence of ice formation was determined by the different cryoprotectant concentration in the different parts.
At the point of-150 °C, the phenomena in the four groups were different. In the group of S groups and V1, the whole field of view was obscured by the extra-cellular ice. However, in V2 group, the solutions outside embryos were transparent, like solid glass. We inferred that the outer solution vitrified. The difference of cryoprotectants caused the different phenomena between V1 and V2, because PG (used in V2) vitrifies more easily than DMSO [25]. The embryos in V group did not vitrify, which indicated that the cryoprotectant concentration of inner embryo was not high enough to form vitrification at this cooling rate. It indicated that limited or no cryoprotectant penetrated into the yolk and developing embryo. Yolk syncytial layer (YSL) was the major obstacle for the penetration of the cryoprotectant into the embryo. This was coincide with many researches [26].
In the thawing process, devitrification or/and recrystallization usually take place. Devitrification is the transition of glassy to crystalline state and recrystallization is the growth of existing ice crystals. In our experiment, the transparent space in V2 group was obscured during thawing, which indicated that devitrification had occurred in extra-cellular ice. Recrystallization had also occurred within the embryos in all four groups, for the embryos were all turned bright in the thawing process. Devitrification and recrystallization were thought to be the major reason for cellular damage associated with the thawing process of cryopreserved cells, for they could cause ice crystals formation and larger ice crystals [27]. To avoid devitrification and recrystallization, the specimens must be warming at higher rate than the critical warming rate [23]. However, there are no effective means to avoid them at the present time because of the technique limitation.
5. Conclusion
In the present study, we compared conventional slow cooling method and vitrification method in red seabream embryos cryopreservation. In V groups, the
Acknowledgments
This work is supported by Regional Demonstration of Marine Economy Innovative Development Project (No. 12PYY001SF08)” and National Infrastructure of Fishery Germplasm Resources.
References
- 1.
Cabrita E., Chereguini O., Luna M., Paz de.P., Herráez M.P., 2003, Effect of different treatments on the chorion permeability to DMSO of turbot embryos. Aquaculture 221, 593–604. - 2.
Gwo J.C., 2000, Cryopreservation of sperm of some marine fishes. In: Tiersch T.R., Mazik P.M. (Eds.) Advances in World Aquaculture. Baton Rouge, Louisiana, USA, World Aquaculture Society, pp. 138–160. - 3.
Chen S.L., 2002, Progress and prospect of cryopreservation of fish gametes and embryos. J. Fish. Chi. 26, 161–168. - 4.
Robles V., Cabrita E., Paz de. P., Cuñado S., Anel L., Herráez M.P., 2004, Effect of a vitrification protocol on the lactate dehydrogenase and glucose-6-phosphate dehydrogenase activities and the hatching rates of Zebrafish ( Danio rerio ) and Turbot (Scophthalmus maximus ) embryos. Theriogenology 61, 1367–1379. - 5.
Ding F.H., Xiao Z.Z., Li J., 2007, Preliminary studies on the vitrification of red sea bream ( Pagrus major ) embryos. Theriogenology 68, 702–708. - 6.
Li J., Zhang L.L., Liu Q.H., Xu X.Z., Xiao Z.Z., Chen Y.K., Ma D.Y., Xu S.H., Xue Q.Z., 2009, Extra-and intra-cellular ice formation of red seabream ( Pagrus major ) embryos at different cooling rates. Cryobiology 59, 48-53. - 7.
Naik B.R., Rao B.S., Vagdevi R., Gnanprakash M., Amarnath D., Rao V.H., 2005, Conventional slow freezing, vitrification and open pulled straw (OPS) vitrification of rabbit embryos. Ani. Reprod. Sci. 86, 329–338. - 8.
Kuleshova L.L., Lopata A. 2002, Vitrification can be more favorable than slow cooling. Fertil. Steril. 78, 449-454. - 9.
Kasai M., Zhu S.E., Pedro P.B., Nakamura K., Sakurai T., Edashige K., 1996, Fracture damage of embryos and its prevention during vitrification and warming. Cryobiology 33, 459–464. - 10.
Robles V., Cabrita E., Real M., Álvarez R., Herráez M.P., 2003, Vitrification of turbot embryos: preliminary assays. Cryobiology 47, 30–39. - 11.
Hagedorn M., Peterson A., Mazur P., Kleinhans F.W., 2004, High ice nucleation temperature of zebrafish embryos: slow-cooling is not an option. Cryobiology 49, 181–189. - 12.
Guenther J.F., Seki S, Kleinhans F.W., Edashige K., Roberts D.M., Mazur P., 2006, Extra-and intra-cellular ice formation in Stage I and II Xenopus laevis oocytes. Cryobiology 52, 401–416. - 13.
Chen S.L., Tian Y.S., 2005, Cryopreservation of flounder ( Paralichthys olivaceus ) embryos by vitrification. Theriogenology 63, 1207–1219. - 14.
Edashige K., Delgado M., Valdez Jr., Hara T., Saida N., Seki S., Kasai M., 2006, Japanese flounder (Paralichthys olivaceus) embryos are difficult to cryopreserve vitrification. Cryobiology 53, 96-106. - 15.
Ding F.H., 2005, Sperm and Embyo Cryopreservation of Red Sea Bream ( Pagrosomus Major ). M.S. Thesis. Graduate University of Chinese Academy of Sciences, Beijing City, P. R. China. - 16.
Chambers J.A.A., Rickwood D., 1993,.Biochemistry LabFaX. Oxford, UK, Bios scientific Publishers, Academic Press. - 17.
Cabrita E., Robles V., Chereguini O., Paz de. P., Anel L., Herraéz M.P., 2003, Dimethyl sulfoxide influx in turbot embryos exposed to a vitrification protocol. Theriogenology 60, 463–473. - 18.
Rawson D.M., Zhang T., Kalicharan D., Joegebloed W.L., 2000, Field emission scanning microscopy transmission electron microscopy studies of the chorion plasma membrane and syncytial layers of the gastrula-stage embryo of the zebrafish Brachydanio rerio : a consideration of the structural and functional relationship with respect to cryoprotectant penetration. Aquac. Res. 31, 325–336. - 19.
Valdez D.M., Miyamoto A., Hara T., Seki S., Kasai M., Edashige K., 2005, Water-and cryoprotectant-permeability of mature and immature oocytes in the medaka ( Oryzias latipes ). Cryobiology 50, 93–102. - 20.
Kobayashi A., Shirai Y., Nakanishi K., Matsuno R., 1996, A method for making large agglomerated ice crystals for freeze concentration. J. Food Eng. 27, 1–15. - 21.
Liu X.H., Zhang T.T., Rawson D.M., 1998, Feasibility of vitrification of zebrafish ( Danio rerio ) embryos using methanol. Cryo-Letters 19, 309–318. - 22.
Bernard A., Fuller B.J., 1996, Cryopreservation of human oocytes: a review of current problems and perspectives. Hum. Reprod. Update 2, 193–207. - 23.
Bart A., 2000, New approaches in cryopreservation of fish embryos. In: Tierch T.R., Mazik P.M., (Eds.) Cryopreservation in aquatic species. Baton Rouge, LA, World Aquaculture Society, pp. 179–187. - 24.
Billard R., Zhang T., 2001, Techniques of genetic resource banking in fish. In: Watson P.F., Holt W.V., (Eds.) Cryobanking the genetic resource. Wildlife conservation for the future. London, Taylor and Francis Press, pp. 145–170. - 25.
Baudot A., Alger L., Boutron P., Glass-forming tendency in the system water–dimethyl sulfoxide. Cryobiology 2000, 40, 151–158. - 26.
Zhang T., Rawson D.M., 1998, Permeability of Dechorionated One-Cell and Six-Somite Stage Zebrafish ( Brachydanio rerio ) Embryos to Water and Methanol. Cryobiology 37, 13–21. - 27.
Robles V., Cabrita E., Fletcher G.L., Shears M.A., King M.J., Herraéz M.P., 2005, Vitrification assays with embryos from a cold tolerant sub-arctic fish species. Theriogenology 64, 1633–1646.